Raids, Road
Watches, and Reconnaissance: New Zealand's involvement in the Long Range Desert
Group in North Africa, 1940-1943
by Clive Gower-Collins
Introduction
Brain-child of a Royal Signals officer, Major Ralph Bagnold, the Long Range
Desert Group (LRDG) was formed in Egypt in June 1940 to meet the British Middle
East Command's urgent need for reliable tactical intelligence. Bagnold's
Commander-in-Chief, General Archibald Wavell, recognised the dangerously
impoverished state of Britain's intelligence resources early in the Desert War
and authorised the formation of the unit, charging it with the responsibility
for conducting reconnaissance deep in the Libyan Desert. An acute shortage of
British manpower at the time and the fortuitous presence of the 2nd New Zealand
Expeditionary Force led to New Zealand making a strong commitment to the LRDG
which lasted throughout the three years of the desert campaign.
Origins and Establishment
With the outbreak of war with Germany in 1939, and the possibility of war with
Italy, proposals were made for the establishment of a specialised unit to carry
out reconnaissance, intelligence gathering, and raiding deep in the Libyan
Desert. Initially, none of these proposals was accepted. It took a combination
of Italy's decision to declare war on 10 June 1940, and a Commander-in-Chief
(C-in-C) known for his "love of the unorthodox"[1], General Archibald Wavell,
to provide adequate stimulus for the foundation of what were initially
described as the 'Long Range Patrols'.
A quarter of a century before the establishment of the Long Range Desert Group
(LRDG), British commanders entrusted with Egypt's defence had faced the
possibility of an attack from the west. The open terrain of North Africa
demanded mobile troops and, in the British Army of 1915, mobility meant horses.
The reliance of these units upon ready supplies of food and water rendered them
incapable of undertaking tasks that took them more than a few kilometres from
the northern coast. In order to patrol the desert frontier further inland,
'Light Car Patrols' were raised. It was then that the earliest experiments were
made in motorised desert travel. However, the close of hostilities in 1918
brought the army's interest in mobile desert patrols largely to an end. Troops
in vehicles would still occasionally make their way out into the 'western
desert', but now on the affairs of the Desert Survey Office, a branch of the
Egyptian 'Frontier Districts Administration'.[2]
Official surveys and private expeditions, including those sustained by the
Royal Geographical Society, continued throughout the inter-war period. Such
excursions helped continue crucial developments in desert navigation,
mechanical modifications that enabled vehicles to cope with the demands of
terrain and climate, and personal desert skills. As Bill Kennedy Shaw, a former
LRDG intelligence officer points out: "To exist at all in the Qattara
Depression or in the Sand Sea in June or in the Gebel Akhdar in February is in
itself a science which practice develops into an art."[3] More than a few
members of this band of desert explorers went on to make exceptional
contributions to the Allied war effort in North Africa. Principally this was as
LRDG officers and navigators, although there were also individuals such as
Vladimir Peniakoff who gained recognition as the commander of 'Popski's Private
Army'.
The LRDG owed its existence to the doggedness of one of the 'band's' members,
Major Ralph Bagnold. Chance found Bagnold in Egypt in late 1939 where he
repeatedly suggested to his superiors the establishment of a desert
reconnaissance unit. Acceptance of his idea followed the Italian declaration of
war in June 1940 and a summons by his C-in-C, General Wavell to explain his
ideas. Bagnold later recalled:
|
I was sent for by Wavell and I told him that we needed a small mobile force
able to penetrate the Desert to the west of Egypt to see what was going on.
Wavell said: 'What if you find the Italians are not doing anything in the
interior at all?'
I said without thinking: 'How about some piracy on the high desert?'
At this his rather stern face broke into a grin, and he said: 'Can you be ready
in six weeks?'
I replied: 'Yes, provided . . .'
'Yes, I know,' he interrupted, 'there'll be opposition and delay.'
He then rang his bell and a lieutenant-general came in as the Chief-of-Staff.
Wavell said: "Bagnold seeks a talisman. Get this typed out and I'll sign it
straightaway: "I wish that any request made by Major Bagnold in person should
be met instantly and without question." '
And it was like a talisman. I had complete carte blanche to do anything I
liked.[4]
|
|
Whatever criticisms could be made of some of Wavell's judgements as a military
commander, his decision to allow the formation of the Long Range Patrols
demonstrated a judicious appreciation of the North African situation.[5] Events
during the preceding eight months had left Wavell in a position inferior to the
Italians in terms of both manpower and material. British productive capacity
had been exceeded in building-up the British Expeditionary Force, making up for
the loss of nearly all the Force's equipment in the flight from Dunkirk, and
expanding the British 'Home' defence forces in the ensuing panic. So supplies
to the Middle East forces had been token at best. This was compounded by the
fact that in the previous October Wavell had been advised that he was to
observe a "defensive policy" and that any demands he made for forces and their
material requisites were to be based upon this.[6] Even the increasing arrival
of reinforcements from Australia, New Zealand, India and other Commonwealth and
Empire countries did little to ease his predicament as the contribution was one
of good keen men accompanied by little or no equipment.
However, despite the apparent superiority of their position, the Italians
demonstrated little eagerness in June 1940 for attacking the British outright.
Instead, they limited themselves to what the British Official History
disparagingly describes as: "a rather clumsy form of reconnaissance".[7]
Wavell's fear was that his somewhat poorly motivated Italian enemy might be
augmented by German armour and motorised infantry, thereby adding both
substance and resolve to the danger from the West.
Any threat to the Upper Nile and the British river-borne supply route from
Khartoum to Cairo was of paramount concern.[8] The "Admiralty declared
themselves unable to pass even military convoys through the Mediterranean on
account of the air dangers,"[9] and the Luftwaffe bombed and mined the Suez
Canal.[10] Hence, heavy equipment had to be landed at Port Sudan on the Red Sea
coast and rail transported across to the Nile. The Italian capture of the Kufra
Oasis 700 miles south-west of Cairo from the native tribesmen in 1931 had
intensified this potential threat to the Nile route, as it was the key to the
southern region of Libya known as the Fezzan. Two possibilities had to be
planned for. Firstly, that the enemy might use Kufra as a base for launching a
ground and airborne drive across to the Red Sea, and cutting Wavell's re-supply
route for forces in Egypt and the Sudan. Secondly, Italian forces located
beyond Matruh and Sollum might attempt to seize Egypt, while forces in Eritrea
and Abyssinia attacked the Sudan in an effort to unite Axis-held Libya with
Italian possessions in East Africa.[11]
In meeting these threats, Wavell's situation might have been improved had the
intelligence resources at his disposal been adequate to provide him with
detailed intelligence of enemy movements and capabilities. Instead, an
optimistic view of the unlikelihood of another war and the desire to curb
military spending in the wake of the costs of World War One did much to ensure
that "while the resources deployed on military intelligence are bound to be run
down in peace-time, they were reduced after 1918 for a longer period and to a
greater extent than was wise."[12] Those that remained acquired a new emphasis
towards air-intelligence that reflected predictions that the wars of the future
would be 'air-wars'. Even in this Wavell was unfortunate, as the reconnaissance
aircraft available to him lacked the necessary range to provide the information
he required. In 1940, Air Chief Marshal Longmore's demands for a more suitable
type of aircraft were still a long way from being met. The only option was to
persevere with the few Lysanders already present, but they lacked both range
and defensive capability, demanding constant fighter escorts.[13] The threat of
an invasion of England was given as the principal reason that aircraft could
not be spared for Middle East duty.[14] Not that additional aircraft would have
helped much, given that only one of the existing five Egyptian airfields had a
runway capable of supporting the operation of modern aircraft.[15]
A significant intelligence asset available to senior British commanders
throughout the war was high-grade signals intelligence (SIGINT); yet even this
was denied to Wavell due to Italy substituting many of her critical ciphers on
declaring war. Britain's continuing ability to decode Italian diplomatic
signals was of small consolation as these dealt largely with trade and Italian
intelligence efforts, shedding little light on operations or plans.[16] The
break-through with the Italian Air Force ciphers, which would contribute so
much to the British counter-offensive in December, could not have been foreseen
at this time.[17]
However, Wavell's lack of intelligence resources was not simply the outcome of
two decades of parsimony and a measure of Italian prudence. A contributing
factor was that, taken as a whole, military intelligence had been regarded by
officers for years as underhand, contemptible, the very antithesis of the ethos
of the officer corps with its emphasis on honour and courage. Labouring under
such a stigma, the outcome was inevitable. As military psychologist Norman
Dixon observes: "The history of the various departments of espionage and
counter-espionage, of 'special operations' and the like, is one of badly
staffed, ill-equipped Cinderella organisations struggling to perform their
duties in the face of contempt, jealousy, and resentment."[18]
Wavell did not subscribe to this antipathetic attitude towards intelligence,
even though he suffered as a result of its pervasiveness. In fact, leading
intelligence historian F. H. Hinsley stresses that Wavell was a "notable
exception", and elsewhere he is accepted as being blessed with " imagination
and love of the unorthodox".[19] These personal attributes certainly had much
to do with Wavell's ability to recognise the opportunity presented by Bagnold's
suggestion. However, before putting Wavell into too 'visionary' a light, it is
worth recognising that forces operating at a numerical or material disadvantage
have a strong incentive to operate 'unconventionally'. Clausewitz suggests:
"The weaker the forces that are at the disposal of the supreme commander, the
more appealing the use of cunning becomes. The bleaker the situation . . .
[the] more readily cunning is joined to daring".[20] A former Oxford Don turned
officer, David Hunt offered a slightly different explanation. He recalled that
in the early years of the war he noticed
|
A certain lack of self-confidence among regular officers. They had been under
attack so long from the intellectuals, with [cartoonist] Low and his Colonel
Blimp marching at their head, that some of them began to have doubts about
their firmest opinions. Many times in the coming years I was surprised at the
way in which regular officers whom I knew to have keen and acute brains would
allow themselves to be put upon by bogus intellectuals . . . they [the
officers] knew they were supposed to be hidebound, conventional and set in
their ways; it was less trouble in the long run to allow a little waste to take
place rather than get themselves written down as unimaginative. A good deal of
the proliferation of special forces, private armies, separate
intelligence-gathering organizations, was due to the same fear.[21]
|
|
Thus armed with both motives and means, Wavell approved the establishment of
the Long Range Patrols with the objectives of "Reconnaissance, military,
geographical and political. For propaganda among tribes in distant parts of
enemy territory . . . To cause the enemy to expend fuel, vehicles and aircraft
in protecting both his isolated posts and their supply columns against
attack."[22]
With Wavell's support for raising the patrols, Bagnold arranged for other
interwar desert explorers to join him.[23] He later reflected on their
contribution:
|
The very long raids across the whole width of Libya which have been carried out
by the patrols have only been made possible by the presence of one or two
officers with many years experience of similar work in peace time. It is
doubtful if patrol leaders without such experience would ever learn enough in
war time to achieve comparable results.[24]
|
|
This group of officers, the official British war history suggests:
|
felt that no recruits would be more suitable than men from the 'outback', like
some of the Queenslanders in Palestine, but the Australian Government was
opposed to its men serving outside Australian formations and General Blamey
felt unable to agree. Three patrols, each of two officers and about thirty men,
were chosen from the New Zealanders in Egypt.[25]
|
|
The suggestion that the New Zealanders were approached only following an
Australian refusal is an interesting and doubtful one. It was true that Blamey
was asked by the British to lend a variety of specialised units, and had
refused "point-blank,"[26] but the official view does not correspond with
Bagnold's own account:
|
Within six weeks we'd got together a volunteer force of New Zealanders. The New
Zealand Division had arrived in Egypt but had yet to be supplied with arms and
equipment because of shipping losses. So they were at a loose end. Apart from
that, I wanted responsible volunteers who knew how to look after and maintain
things, rather than the ordinary British Tommy who was apt to be wasteful. They
were a marvellous lot of people, mostly sheep farmers who'd had trucks of their
own and were used to looking after them.[27]
|
|
The former patrol commander and eventual Commanding Officer of the LRDG, David
Lloyd Owen, supports Bagnold, suggesting: "Although I have been aware of this
claim I do not believe there is any substance in it."[28] Bagnold, in the
presence of General Wilson and various staff officers, put the request for
volunteers to Brigadier Edward Puttick, commander of the New Zealand troops in
Egypt.[29] Puttick agreed in principle, subject to final authorisation by the
Second New Zealand Expeditionary Force's (2NZEF) commander, General Bernard
Freyberg, V.C. Cabling his superior in London on 1 July, Puttick pointed out:
"The greater part can be provided from the Divisional Cavalry, and the
remainder from various units without impairing efficiency, using personnel for
whom equipment is not available. The Divisional Cavalry welcome the opportunity
of higher training and experience and relief from monotony".[30] The following
day, Freyberg cabled his approval of Puttick's request.
The speed of preparation reflected Bagnold's promise to Wavell to have the
patrols ready in only six weeks. On the evening of 4 July, the first volunteers
from the New Zealand Division reported for duty at the Royal Armoured Corps
Base Depot at Abbassia. In four days these men and a few from the Royal
Armoured Corps took over barracks, administration offices, technical and
quartermaster's stores and prepared for the arrival of the bulk of the
volunteers. By 11 July, the first of two former Egyptian Army trucks arrived
after being modified in the workshops of the Pharonic Mail Line in Alexandria.
On 16 July, the greater part of the New Zealand party arrived from their base
at Maadi. Training in gunnery, signals, driving and use of the 'Bagnold
Sun-compass' began the next morning. The balance of the New Zealand personnel
marched in to Abbassia on 25 July and were arranged into patrols. Training
continued with the vehicles venturing further and further afield. A formal
inspection of '1 Long Range Patrol' by the Commander-in-Chief, General Wavell
took place on 27 August, followed by an informal visit by Brigadier Puttick to
look in on his men three days later.[31]
Trained and equipped, Bagnold's Long Range Patrol was ready for operations,
unaware that a dispute over British 'borrowing' of New Zealand troops would
soon become serious enough to throw this, or any other, New Zealand
contribution to the LRDG into doubt.
Show Footnotes
[1]. I.S.O. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1: The Early
Successes Against Italy (to May 1941), London: Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, 1954, p.295.
[2]. Peter Clayton, Desert Explorer: A Biography of Colonel P.A. Clayton DSO,
MBE, FRGS, FRCS, FGS, 1896-1962 , Cargreen, Cornwall: Zerzura Press,
1998, p. 20.
[3]. Shaw, Long Range Desert Group: The Story of its Work in Libya, 1940-1943
, London: Collins, 1945, p.19.
[4]. Quoted in: Adrian Gilbert, The Imperial War Museum Book of the Desert War
, London: Sidgewick and Jackson, 1992, p.189.
[5]. For criticism of Wavell, see for example: Winston S. Churchill, The Second
World War, Vol. III: The Grand Alliance , London: The Reprint Society,
1950, pp.280-285, & Calvocoressi, P., Top Secret Ultra, London: Cassell
Ltd., 1980, p.80.
[6]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1: The Early Successes
Against Italy (to May 1941) , London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
1954, p.55.
[7]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1: The Early Successes
Against Italy (to May 1941) , London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
1954, p.205.
[8]. Winston S. Churchill, The Second World War, Vol. II: Their Finest Hour
, London: Cassell and Co., 1949, pp.370-371.
[9]. Churchill, The Second World War, Vol. II: Their Finest Hour ,
p.370.
[10]. G. Weinberg, A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II ,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, 214.
[11]. R. A. Bagnold, "Early Days of the Long Range Desert Group" The
Geographical Journal , [Evening Meeting of the Society, 15 January
1945], Vol.: CV, No 1 & 2, Jan-Feb 1945, p.31.
[12]. F.H. Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War: Its Influence
on Strategy and Operations, Vol. I , London: Her Majesty's Stationery
Office, 1979, p.10.
[13]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1: The Early Successes
Against Italy (to May 1941) , London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
1954, p.192-193.
[14]. Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War, Vol. I ,
p.207.
[15]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1: The Early Successes
Against Italy (to May 1941) , London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office,
1954.
[16]. Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War, Vol. I ,
p.206.
[17]. Hinsley, British Intelligence in the Second World War, Vol. I ,
p.375.
[18]. Norman Dixon, On the Psychology of Military Incompetence ,
London: Random House, 1994. p.293.
[19]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1 , p.295.
[20]. Quoted in: M. I. Handel, "Intelligence and Deception", in John Gooch,
& Amos Perlmutter, (eds.)., Military Deception and Strategic Surprise
, London: Frank Cass & Co. Ltd., 1982, p.124.
[21]. D. Hunt, A Don at War , London: Frank Cass and Co., Ltd., 1990,
pp.14-15.
[22]. R. A. Bagnold, Notes on Long Range Desert Patrols for operations in the
Interior of LIBYA , Cairo: Long Range Desert Group, 11 February 1941.
NZ National Archives: WAII, 1, DA304.1/10/1.
[23]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1 , p.295.
[24]. Bagnold, Notes on Long Range Desert Patrols for Operations in the
Interior of LIBYA .
[25]. Playfair, The Mediterranean and Middle East, Vol. 1 , p.295.
[26]. Paul Freyberg, Bernard Freyberg V.C.: Soldier of Two Nations ,
London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., 1991, p.233.
[27]. Quoted in: Gilbert, The Imperial War Museum Book of the Desert War
, London: Sidgewick and Jackson, 1992, p.189.
[28]. Letter to author from D. Lloyd Owen, 13 April 1999.
[29]. At this time, Wilson was 'General Officer Commanding British Troops in
Egypt'.
[30]. Department of Internal Affairs (War History Branch), Documents Relating
to New Zealand's Participation in the Second World War, 1939-45, Vol. 1
, Wellington (NZ): Government Printer, 1949, p.232.
[31]. Long Range Desert Group (LRDG), 'R' (New Zealand) Patrol, LRDG War Diary
(July - September 1940) , Abbassia (Egypt). NZ National Archives: DA
144/1/1-3.
Copyright © 2006 Clive Gower-Collins.
Written by Clive Gower-Collins. If you have questions or comments on this
article, please contact Clive Gower-Collins at:
Clive Gower-Collins
PO Box 2526
Wellington 6011
New Zealand
About the author:
Clive Gower-Collins lives in Wellington, New Zealand and has served in
the New Zealand Army in both Infantry and Engineer roles. Currently a
manager with Biosecurity New Zealand, He has worked for a number of
years across the public service specialising in leadership and
organisational performance. He has written articles, presented
conference papers and given radio interviews on coalition warfare and
the LRDG. His research interests tend to focus on aspects of
intelligence in warfare (the general focus of his MA in History) and
German aircraft design and production in the inter-war years and
throughout WWII (the focus of his Honours research).
Published online: 07/24/2006.
* Views expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent
those of MHO. |